Rights to a commission?

Originally Posted by Underdog07

What you are suggesting contradicts established laws re artists' right and general copyright principles. If I have time tomorrow I will add some links.

What I'm trying to say is, let see how far Marvel or an artist gets trying to come into my house and use a piece of art that I own.

[Fat Head]

Originally Posted by Tattoo-X

What I'm trying to say is, let see how far Marvel or an artist gets trying to come into my house and use a piece of art that I own.

If the artist still has a high res scan and wants to send it off to whatever publisher wants it they can. They don't NEED your permission. They will probably ask out of courtesy though, just like someone said before, they don't want to risk losing more potential sales. Unless your transaction made specific mention of you owning the right to publish/reproduce that particular work, then you don't. If Marvel wanted to reproduce an image that so and so made, which was not created for THEM, then they'd need to contact the creator of the artwork, unless that creator has transferred those publishing/reproduction rights (to the owner of the artwork or anyone else).

Whenever Marvel (or whatever publisher) contracts out an artist to create an image for them, it would be stated in any documents the artist had to sign, that they are creating the work for marvel, so that marvel can publish it, thus giving them reproduction rights. Such is not the case for personal commissions, unless you have an artist issue you some agreement in writing that you will own those rights. Most artists who have a website or something put a disclaimer in their commissions section stating that any commissioned artwork they produce, they own the rights to. This is the case by default, they don't actually HAVE to say that.

[statman]

Originally Posted by Tattoo-X

What I'm trying to say is, let see how far Marvel or an artist gets trying to come into my house and use a piece of art that I own.

They don't need to go into your house if the artist has a hi res scan of the piece that he did for you. In most cases, I think the artists make hi-res scans for just such purposes.

[Raven1014]

Originally Posted by Tattoo-X

What I'm trying to say is, let see how far Marvel or an artist gets trying to come into my house and use a piece of art that I own.

I had a piece done by Tim Seeley with characters he created (Hack/Slash) along with a few movie slashers. He had it made into a colored print that only a few were made of (something like 25). When we met up at a convention we were discussing how well it came out and talked about him putting it as a page in the back of one of the books. He said I'd have to sign permission to him to allow him to print it, even just to show it as a commission he did for a fan.

Any way you look at it. I own the piece, and proudly so. Maybe I should quit posting my collection. At lease that would stop the offers I've been getting for them.

[daikins]

"maybe I should quit posting my collection".

I'm confused as to why you think this will stop an artist from using a commission that they did for you for other things?
It would definately stop someone other then the artist from doing something with it. Assuming that the artist didn't post it or reprint it. I had a douchebag inker sell recreations of my Bob layton commissions. Dumbass Ray Kryssing... man that pissed me off!

As far as I know, there is NO incident of a collector successfully taking legal action against an artist for the artist using a commission for something else. There are probably many incidents of an artist taking legal action against a collector using a commission... or at least there could be...
The main thing is client relations. If an artist pisses off too many collectors, then they lose clients. Having an artist create or publish exact or even derivative works based on a commission that is understood to be unique could possibly alienate your customers. If the majority of collectors don't mind, then it's no big deal.

All of this is solved with good communication.

The fun part of this is that when you are dealing with someone else's characters, reproduction is illegal unless done by the owners of the characters. It's quite possible that even the commissions themselves are illegal as the artist is profiting from someone else's characters.
The only loop hole is "fair use" educational or journalistic publications. Some of which push it waaaaaaaay too far.
It's a fun mess! whoopee!!!!!!!!

[daikins]

Here's some info on Fair Use, from the The University of Chicago Press:
"The doctrine of fair use was originally developed by judges as an equitable limit on the absolutism of copyright. Although fair use is incorporated into the most recent copyright law, there is no hard and fast definition of fair use; fair use in one instance may be copyright infringement in another. No one can give an absolute prediction of how a court may rule in a particular case, so one should not make claims of fair use frivolously. Claims of fair use will be evaluated by the Contracts and Permissions office of the University of Chicago Press, though the legal and financial liability is ultimately the Author’s.
In determining whether the use of copyrighted materials can be considered fair use, four factors must be considered:

1. the purpose and character of the use, including whether such use is of a commercial nature or is for nonprofit educational purpose;
2. the nature of the copyrighted work;
3. the amount and substantiality of the portion used in relation to the copyrighted work as a whole; and
4. the effect of the use upon the potential market for or value of the copyrighted work. The fact that a work is unpublished shall not itself bar a finding of fair use if such finding is made upon consideration of all the above factors.
Since copyright is essentially a means of protecting financial interests, it is easier to make a case for the fair use exception for scholarly books or books with relatively small print runs. As a rule of thumb for scholarly works, short prose extracts, and poetry extracts (no more than 3 or 4 lines, sometimes as few as 1 or 2 lines, depending on the length of the poem) will fall under fair use, provided they are the subject of discussion in the book, and no permission need be sought. It is more difficult to make a claim of fair use for copyrighted works of visual art reproduced in their entirety, and Authors are encouraged to err on the side of caution in such cases.

[marvelboi77]

Well Perez is exclusive with DC. So DC may not want a cover of a magazine with a Perez Avengers cover floating around.

Originally Posted by daikins

"maybe I should quit posting my collection".

I'm confused as to why you think this will stop an artist from using a commission that they did for you for other things?
It would definately stop someone other then the artist from doing something with it. Assuming that the artist didn't post it or reprint it. I had a douchebag inker sell recreations of my Bob layton commissions. Dumbass Ray Kryssing... man that pissed me off!

As far as I know, there is NO incident of a collector successfully taking legal action against an artist for the artist using a commission for something else. There are probably many incidents of an artist taking legal action against a collector using a commission... or at least there could be...
The main thing is client relations. If an artist pisses off too many collectors, then they lose clients. Having an artist create or publish exact or even derivative works based on a commission that is understood to be unique could possibly alienate your customers. If the majority of collectors don't mind, then it's no big deal.

All of this is solved with good communication.

The fun part of this is that when you are dealing with someone else's characters, reproduction is illegal unless done by the owners of the characters. It's quite possible that even the commissions themselves are illegal as the artist is profiting from someone else's characters.
The only loop hole is "fair use" educational or journalistic publications. Some of which push it waaaaaaaay too far.
It's a fun mess! whoopee!!!!!!!!

Much of my collection is made up of convention sketches. If I don't post the images, NO ONE will be able to use without my permission. Yet, I'm still posting.

[Underdog07]

here is an article on reproduction rights in california -- it actually contains info dealing with the greeting card scenario

http://www.tfaoi.com/articles/andres/aa2.htm

This also says in california that the person making the mag would be liable to the artist not the owner of the original work


here is the artists rights in oregan

http://www.oregonartscommission.org/...2002-07-01.php

359.355 Art work reproduction rights retained by artist unless expressly transferred; effect of federal copyright laws. (1) Whenever a work of fine art is sold or otherwise transferred by or on behalf of the artist who created it, or the heirs or personal representatives thereof, the right of reproduction thereof is reserved to the grantor until the right passes into the public domain pursuant to federal copyright laws unless the right is sooner expressly transferred by an instrument, note or memorandum in writing signed by the owner of the rights conveyed or the duly authorized agent thereof.